Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered 2.1 Introduction The evaluation processes that were used comply with guidelines of the National Environmental Policy Act This chapter describes the alternatives and how they (NEPA); the Washington State Environmental Policy were developed for study in this Final Environmental Act (SEPA); and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Impact Statement (EIS). The 2008 Draft EIS evaluated a Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A Legacy for No Build Alternative and 19 build alternatives within Users (SAFETEA-LU). five segments (Segments A to E) for an approximately The proposed project consists of constructing and 18-mile extension of the Link light rail system, from operating an approximately 18-mile light rail system Downtown Seattle to Redmond across the Interstate 90 known as East Link. This system would connect with (I-90) bridge. Since the 2008 Draft EIS was published, Sound Transit’s Central Link at the International the Sound Transit Board has reviewed public and District/Chinatown Station, and it then would travel agency comments; added five additional alternatives east across Lake Washington via I–90 to Mercer Island, and some design options to existing alternatives, most Downtown Bellevue, and Bel-Red/Overlake, of which were analyzed in the 2010 Supplemental terminating in Downtown Redmond. Exhibit 2-1 Draft EIS (SDEIS); and identified and refined the shows the five project segments and the 24 alternative preferred alternatives for each segment. In response to routes with the proposed stations that are considered the SDEIS, additional design options have been for detailed environmental review in this Final EIS. A included and analyzed in this Final EIS. No Build Alternative is also included to describe how The alternatives described here meet the East Link the transportation system would operate if the Project purpose and need and include alternatives proposed project were not built, thus serving to reviewed as part of the environmental review process compare effects of the build alternatives. as well as those eliminated from consideration. EXHIBIT 2-1 East Link Project Segments and Alternatives East Link Project Final EIS 2-1 July 2011 Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered The remainder of this chapter is organized into the including the south boundary of Surrey Downs following subsections: Park. 2.2 Alternative Development and Public Scoping Segment C, Downtown Bellevue, travels from SE Process 6th Street north to NE 12th Street, encompassing Downtown Bellevue and the area east of I-405 to 2.3 Project Alternatives the former BNSF Railway corridor. 2.4 Overview of Construction Approach Segment D, Bel-Red/Overlake, travels from 2.5 Environmental Commitments Downtown Bellevue (from the former BNSF Railway corridor or NE 12th Street) to the 2.6 Estimated Projects Costs and Funding Overlake Transit Center at the intersection of NE 2.7 Next Steps and Schedule 40th Street and State Route 520 (SR 520). 2.2 Alternative Development and Segment E, Downtown Redmond, travels from the Overlake Transit Center to Downtown Public Scoping Process Redmond, with three potential project terminus locations. As stated in Chapter 1, the East Link Project and the alternatives considered in this document build on the The alternative evaluation process was also informed conclusions of previous planning, studies, and public by an Inter-Agency Team that included the involvement processes dating back to the mid-1960s. Washington State Department of Transportation In particular, the Sound Transit Board made the (WSDOT); U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE); following major decisions after extensive evaluation Federal Transit Administration (FTA); Federal and review with agencies and the public before Highway Administration (FHWA); Cities of Seattle, beginning this EIS process: Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond; and King County. In addition, Sound Transit attended and Regional high-capacity transit (HCT) to the presented information about East Link at Eastside via I–90 is necessary. neighborhood organizations, stakeholder gatherings, Light rail is the selected HCT technology for the and upon request, city council and other board I-90/East Corridor connecting Seattle, Mercer meetings. Refer to Appendix B for more detail. Island, Bellevue, Overlake, and Redmond. 2.2.1 Criteria for Evaluation Sound Transit’s light rail alternatives development The Sound Transit evaluation criteria were designed process for this Final EIS included the following steps: to satisfy the following project planning goals and Identifying feasible alternatives supporting objectives as directed in the East Link Project purpose and need (see Chapter 1): Obtaining scoping comments on alternatives Transportation goal: Improve transit mobility in Conducting a detailed evaluation of refined the East Link corridor. alternatives Maximize East Link ridership. Receiving input on the Draft EIS and SDEIS Improve the quality of transit service. alternatives and responding with modifications Increase transit accessibility. and new alternatives for analysis For evaluation purposes, the East Link study area was Environmental goal: Preserve environmental divided into five segments along distinct geographic quality. boundaries (see Exhibit 2-1). The five segments are as Minimize potential adverse operating impacts follows: on the natural and built environments. Segment A, Interstate-90, travels from the Minimize potential adverse construction Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (where the East impacts on the natural and built Link Project would connect to the Central Link environments. light rail system) to South Bellevue, where I–90 Land use goal: Support regional and local land use touches land in Bellevue. goals and objectives. Segment B, South Bellevue, travels from where I– Support adopted land use and transportation 90 touches land in Bellevue to SE 6th Street, plans. 2-2 East Link Project Final EIS July 2011 Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered Implementation goal: Minimize risk. Construction Risk: Risks were compared against an average risk of geologic and utilities Design system to reduce construction risk. constraints. Enhance stakeholder and community support. Cost: The lowest cost alternatives in each segment Financial goal: Provide a financially feasible were compared. solution. Four maintenance facility sites were identified in Build a system within project budget. Segment D and one in Segment E using the criteria of Build a system that can be operated and compatible land use zoning, relatively flat areas of maintained with available revenue. approximately 15 acres, and convenient access to the Build a system that is cost-effective. light rail vehicles and tracks. 2.2.2 Draft EIS Alternatives 2.2.3 NEPA and SEPA Scoping Process Identification The FTA and Sound Transit held a public scoping and To identify the most promising alternatives to propose comment period to officially initiate the NEPA and during the public scoping process, Sound Transit SEPA EIS process. The scoping period took place from developed 36 preliminary alternatives for the East September 1 to October 2, 2006. Sound Transit invited Corridor between Seattle and the East Link growth city and county agencies; affected tribes; regional, centers of Bellevue, Overlake, and Downtown state, and federal agencies; interest groups; businesses; Redmond. In developing the preliminary alternatives, affected communities; individuals; and the public to Sound Transit reviewed past planning studies in the comment on the proposed routes and stations, the corridor and consulted with state, federal, and local environmental resources to be evaluated, and the agencies in the corridor. project’s preliminary Purpose and Need Statement. The public and agencies were asked to identify areas Segment A included only the Interstate 90 Alternative of concern, opportunities, and stakeholder interests to (A1). Of the 35 alternatives in Segments B through E, be further addressed in the subsequent EIS. Sound Transit, in consultation with the Inter-Agency Team, eliminated 9 alternatives based on the initial During the scoping period, Sound Transit hosted four analysis because of ridership, cost, construction risk, public scoping meetings and one scoping meeting for and environmental impacts. Sound Transit recorded agencies and tribes. The public meetings were held in this process in East Link Alternatives Evaluation Report, Seattle, Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond. Oral Seattle to Bellevue to Redmond (Sound Transit, 2006c). and written comments were accepted. In addition, the public submitted comments directly by mail and Sound Transit advanced 27 alternatives and 5 email. Details of the scoping and outreach activities potential maintenance facility locations for further can be found in Section B.4 of Appendix B, Public evaluation. Sound Transit summarized the results of Involvement and Agency Coordination. the evaluation in Sound Transit Board Briefing Book, Light Rail Alternatives (Sound Transit, 2006b), which Following this process, on December 14, 2006, the was presented to the Sound Transit Board and posted Sound Transit Board identified the alternatives to be on the project website (www.soundtransit.org). This evaluated in the Draft EIS. In December 2008, Sound evaluation highlighted the results in the five Transit, WSDOT, and FTA published the East Link comparative areas for all alternatives: Project Draft EIS, which evaluated a No Build Alternative and 19 build alternatives.